As we have seen before SES has some warped views on disability but I was particularly shocked by one incident described in this private email I received today. The email consists of memories from SES circa 1970 to 1980 some are lighthearted while others deeply tragic. The writer does not want to post themselves for personal reasons and has asked me to do so. (The story about the 50 woman is incredible!)

leon

x writes.

"There was an air of expectant awe in the group, engendered by the Tutor. A Higher Up, Arch Lunatic Shelly was to address us.
Shelly strode in, the Tutor introduced him with servile reverence and the lecture began. More of the same old same old, but no one really noticed that. We were actually in the august presence of one of the legendary Higher Ups.

There was an Epileptic sufferer in the group, a quiet, middle aged man with a self deprecating manner who occasionally had severe fits. Unfortunately for him, he went into one in right the middle of Shelly's address, sliding out of his chair onto the floor, unconscious. So brainwashed were we all, that scarcely any one moved. The Tutor got up to go to the man, but Shelly was there before him. The fit was was, he explained in ringing tones, an attempt on this wretched man's part to deny the Absolute, a refusal to look at the diagram drawn by Shelly's own hand upon the board! What was on the diagram, he asked us? Truth was on the diagram! Would this man look at the diagram, acknowledge the Truth? No, he would not! He preferred unconsciousness to Truth!

He began to yell loudly at the man twitching on the floor, 'Look at my hand, Look at my hand, look at the diagram! Look at the diagram!'
After several minutes of this, the man came to and, finding himself on the floor in the middle of a group with two tutors leaning over him, one of whom was screaming crazily in his face, got up and fled, shaking, out of the room.
Shelly stood up and looked around at the shocked and silent, terrified group members. 'He has gone into outer darkness.' he said. 'He could have turned to the Truth, but he has chosen outer darkness.'

Those of us who witnessed this appalling act of barbarism, carry the guilt of it also. I was very young, but that is no excuse. I left SES shortly after that exhibition of public humiliation and cruelty to a kindly, inoffensive man whose Epilepsy was surely hard enough to bear. Those of us who did leave SES many, many years ago, who woke up and smelled the coffee, still bear the burden of that silent collusion.

It had been a grueling week at Stan Hill Court. A week of hard physical labour, sleep deprivation, and lectures, all of which culminated in a day of fasting. The following day, our last, we all assembled for lunch before leaving for home.
The young man next to me at table had been silent for most of the week. Now he was sitting rigidly, straight backed, trembling as he regarded a large green pear in the center of his plate.
'Its only a pear,' he muttered to himself. 'It is only a pear. A pear. It can't hurt me. It can't possibly hurt me.'
But he did not eat it.

Stan Hill. Laundry duty in a small room with a temperamental and fearsome boiler, which I and a man from another group were to use for the piles of washing we had to do. No mod cons at Stan Hill in those days. I had absolutely no idea what to do with the thing, but he poked and prodded it manfully, although obviously petrified that it would blow up. He had a wife and children.......

'I can see the headlines,' he said nervously, 'Two die in explosion in country house.'

Stan Hill. All groups were assembled for an address by the Head of Level. Heady stuff indeed! What would he say, what pearls of wisdom would he cast before us to be treasured and discussed, what new wisdom had filtered down from the Absolute through the SES hierarchy for our edification?

He entered the room. He stood still. He looked around with an expression of acute displeasure. We held our breath, scarcely dared to move.

'There is a piece of paper on the floor of the upstairs landing.' He said severely. 'There are more than fifty women in this house, and that piece of paper has been there all day.'

He told us that we were virtually doomed. A gentleman, himself, had been painfully forced to observe that piece of paper several times that day; indeed, it was still there ready to offend with its presence any other gentleman who happened to pass by.

A lady, he explained, was created expressly to serve. That was her nature her function and her joy and we had not served. None of us had served. We had denied our true function and that piece of paper was a testament to that denial, which would certainly be noted by the Absolute. The work done that week had been undermined and even destroyed.
The men looked smugly shocked. The ladies shamed. If only, we might well have mused, but were actually too numbed by a week of hard slog, if only I had experienced the joy of picking up that scrap of paper! If only I had known my true function, the whole week at Stan Hill would not have been as dust and ashes, ruined by the total selfishness of women who had failed to be ladies!"

"'Ladies' at Stan Hill.
We had been at Stan Hill for several days now and the intentional group
synergy was having its effect in that the sheep were beginning to separate
from the goats, who were muttering rebelliously, and therefore becoming
visible.
A Tutor suggested brightly that it would be a lovely thing if each Lady
approached a Gentleman and offered to do his washing. The Sheep began to
bleat with pleasure at the thought of hand washing stranger's pants, socks
and shirts! How lovely! What joy! What a wonderful opportunity to serve!

We goats were less excited. One, openly rebelling, lowered her horns and
said firmly 'I'm not washing any bloke's pants.' But the sheep carried the
day, and we each drew a Gentleman's name, most of whom we barely knew, from
a hat, and had the unenviable task of approaching our particular 'Gentleman'
and demanding his dirty washing.

Later that evening, I reluctantly approached the man whose name I had
drawn and asked if I could have his dirty clothes. At Stan Hill, nerves
were always stretched, mental tension already heightened. He looked
nervously at me. 'What for?' he asked, backing away.
'So that I can wash them' I said shortly, goat-like. He retreated yet
further and said defensively 'I'd rather do it myself.'
'Fine by me.' I said, but was later discovered to be laundryless and had
to ask again.
Acutely embarrassed, he finally handed me one shirt, unworn, and I sluiced
it around in a hand basin for a minute or two and, without having actually
ruined it, dried it and handed it back, un-ironed."

"There was excitement among the sheep. An edict had been handed down from
the most ladylike heights, Miss Rosenberg Herself had uttered!

'A Lady must spend no longer than one minute in the lavatory.' A truly
ladylike bowel takes less than a minute to evacuate....... Even when the
diet consists principally of hard cheese?

I think I was one of the stanhill 50 ladies group, it certaintly sends a chill of an unpleasant memory down my spine, I have of course made it a mission to pick up scraps of paper wherever I am as it is my duty as a 'lady'.

I do recall some material from the ladies at home group suggesting that there is evidence that ladies do not enjoy 'sexual relations' and that one woman married for many years described herself as a 'married virgin', this was highly praised and circulated in group material.

I remember a reading of a section of The Taming of the Shrew' presented presumably as an object lesson in supporting SES view of the need to dominate control and make subservient all women and the final speech of submission- I remember challenging that and being met with blank stares and mental notes being taken, by that time I was waking up!

Andrea Lewis

ex member of the SES who has spent many years de-programming myself. Been reading the forum since the channel 4 news stuff. Feel its important for me to use my real name.

At Queensgate in the early 80s until I was 7 years old. Classmates included John Frederic Arthur Farndel and Timothy Body and most importantly, James Warham!. My Grandfather used to manage Sarum Chase in London for many years.

"Ladies Group or Stepford Wives
When a woman complained that she had been ordered by a young man I C (In charge) to move a very heavy piece of furniture, and had refused, she was severely reprimanded.
If a Gentleman made an error of judgment, it was explained, it was actually the Lady's fault as the women create the spiritual atmosphere which enables men to make the appropriate decision. If women did not create the appropriate spiritual atmosphere, then naturally, men would make mistakes. The fault lay with the women, never with the men.
If a man made a mistake, or seemed to be at fault in his conduct, it was certain that the woman or women in his life were not creating a properly 'spiritual substance' (oxymoron? - certainly moron!) This was a concept especially beloved by men in SES. Women somehow exude ?spiritual substance? which men do not.
The right response, we were told, when a Gentleman asked a Lady to do a task far beyond her capability, was for her to cheerfully attempt to do it, no matter if she strained her back or otherwise injured herself. The Gentleman would then realise that she was willing and able to serve, whatever the task, and that would create the right spiritual atmosphere for him to rectify the error and give her a something more suitable to do.
She must on no account point out his error to him, as this created the worst possible spiritual atmosphere.

Washing machines were frowned upon as technology which took human (female) consciousness out of labour and so robbed women of the joy of service. Hand washing gave by far the greater opportunity for joyous, selfless feminine activity. Ironing too was a serious business. There were ladies, it seemed, who did not take this to heart. Some women even ironed a shirt sleeve on an ordinary ironing board, which would result in a sleeve with a crease in it! Shock and incredulous horror were expressed at the very idea!
A good wife would certainly have a dedicated sleeve board, and slip the sleeve onto it, thus being able to present her husband with a creaseless sleeve. Bliss!

But didn't the men use walkie talkies or mobile phones, I asked, having seen them in use when Art in Action was being organised? And what about cars? That was quite another matter. Gentlemen were capable of using and even benefiting from technology.

A lady, on the other hand, should eschew the dubious benefit of a vacuum cleaner and use a dustpan and hand brush.

There was an Epileptic sufferer in the group, a quiet, middle aged man with a self deprecating manner who occasionally had severe fits. Unfortunately for him, he went into one in right the middle of Shelly's address, sliding out of his chair onto the floor, unconscious. So brainwashed were we all, that scarcely any one moved. The Tutor got up to go to the man, but Shelly was there before him. The fit was was, he explained in ringing tones, an attempt on this wretched man's part to deny the Absolute, a refusal to look at the diagram drawn by Shelly's own hand upon the board!

This appalling story just highlights the effect the SES environment can have on presumably 'normal' people. There is a complete detachment from what's going on in reality and all rational thought, action and commonsense is suspended (temporarily or otherwise).

In the case of my father, who was very senior in the SES in the early days, unfortunately that suspension was somewhat prolonged. With this great wisdom he had acquired through the SES teachings, despite his very limited time with us children due to far more important work within the SES, he endeavoured to ensure we were moulded accordingly. Little account was taken of our real wants and more importantly needs as children.

The effect of those unbearable years was that our family relationships completely broke down and apparently my father couldnt understand where he had gone wrong.... if only he had been able to understand what was going on in front of his very eyes and act appropriately, had been able to see the proverbial wood for the trees, things may have been different. He was very much disconnected from the reality of what was happening in our family.

As a parent now myself I feel that may be if he had been able to open his eyes, drag himself away from his heady SES material just for a short while and perhaps read a book or two on child psychology he would have learnt more TRUTH than he ever did. Sadly by the time he realised something was wrong, the damage had been done and he just didnt have the ability, the understanding or the connection with us to rectify it.

Whatever contribution my father made to the SES or what he personally gained from it I dont know, but that was his life's work, and it is ever apparent that part of my life's work will be working through and repairing the damage.

As a final question I would be interested to know what those who are able to give cosy glowing tributes to the SES and their experiences there from the early years, make of the story above, which by no means was unique and in my experience sums up the whole environment. Or perhaps it was just a one off rather unfortuate mistake.

The incident with the women and the piece of paper is hilarious on one level, but on another it speaks volumes... scary.

Posting up some more as I think it is very necessary to have as many members and ex members stories public as there is so little "truth" available on SES.

hello Leon

"Why do ?seemingly normal? people not intervene in cases such as the incident of the man having an epileptic fit? Good question, but the answer is complex and lies in the very careful and conscious structuring and manipulation practiced by cults. It is a calculated, minutely organised program, with ?unsuitable? people weeded out gradually, their presence becoming visible as the group moves further along the insidious mind control process.

Many who joined were very young, perhaps hippies as myself and my friends, naively drawn by lures of philosophy, meditation, and especially land value rating as a means to freeing land for the use of ordinary people. One could follow a friend, husband or acquaintance into SES, not knowing that SES itself had nothing whatever to offer, in fact simply pirated and warped ideologies of others, mixing them into an indigestible brew of plagarised and distorted concepts and techniques, the whole strangely woven into a rigid, highly elitist hierarchical construct, a pseudo upper class public school template, completer with bullies which applied to the whole organisation, not just the schools. This system allowed rapid preferment up the ranks for the wealthy or influential. For the rest, all was predicated on promises of ?cosmic consciousness? and other spiritual goodies to come if ?school discipline? was adhered to. In their large country houses SES members played at being ?Ladies and Gentlemen? Stories of amazing spiritual feats filtered down. MacClaren had ?dissolved a dark cloud of evil over New York with the power of his meditation?

The group synergy used is deliberate and compelling, creating a herd consciousness which turns on any dissenter who might threaten the agreed ?reality? of the group, however bizarre that ?reality? might be. An example is the explanation given that it was ?the sheer spiritual power of Shelly?s lecture that caused the epileptic to retreat into unconsciousness, an act of denial which condemned him to outer darkness?. If that had been challenged, had someone actually helped the man, then the group consciousness could no longer have accepted Shelly as ?higher? than the rest of us, and the whole SES pyramidal construct would have been on shaky ground. He would have been seen as not as a spiritual teacher but as a madman or an inhuman, callous bully.

Another common cult practice is using members as free labour, which is how the country houses are maintained. This large, unpaid workforce is crucial. SES had come a long way from old Andrew MacClaren?s ringing call to ?Free the land and shoot the landlord!? Pincham, in one of his speeches, told how things should be. The rich man in his mansion and the worker happy in his cottage at the rich man?s gate?.

The rebels did drop out along the way, and that was allowed for, was even crucial. Cults are interested in potential sheep, not free thinkers. Leave the rebellious goats to go into outer darkness!
Each degree of madness accepted without rebellion was another ?level achieved? in SES cultic programming and another degree of acquiescence, collusion and therefore dependence on the cult.
If both husband and wife were members, and perhaps their children were pupils at St James/Vedast it was, as we have seen so often, much harder for one of the couple, usually the woman, to dissent and disentangle the family from the SES matrix. Gradually all the cult member?s friends, their doctor, even their dentist, were SES, and when people dropped out they were themselves generally dropped, as that person was then seen as dangerous.
SES rules crept into every aspect of life, governing even the length of time spend defecating, the length of time a child should be breast fed, with different times for boy and girl babies, what sex ?was for? (procreation only) how many hours sleep allowed and on and on. There was a rule for everything.
Leaving thus becomes proportionally more difficult with length of membership, and those who remained within the cult, satisfied with the cult, even closing their eyes to what has been shared on these boards, are speaking from cult manipulated consciousness and must be read accordingly.

There were rebels ...... Long dresses were suddenly adopted, stolen from the hippies and transformed into ankle length straight tubes. The ?sound has gone out? we were told, ?which will end the mini skirt and female trousers? Quite! One young woman refused to abandon her mini until she was threatened with expulsion from the group, which meant from her friends also. She turned up in the regulation long skirt plus........ a transparent blouse...... we didn?t wear bras in the sixties......"

Obviously I don't share the memories many here have, but a few concepts can explain succinctly why people do or don't do things. They are peer pressure/group dynamics and obedience to authority.

Peer pressure is a daily occurrence and not bad, it keeps us out of trouble, but it can also be used to sway you into a direction which is not where you want to go. Like if 5 people sit around a table, all but one work for the experimenter. They pass around a piece of paper with 8 black dots, and each of the people around the table say they see 9 black dots. A great many bow down to the peer pressure and say they see 9 black dots, when they know there's only 8.

If a Gentleman made an error of judgment, it was explained, it was actually the Lady's fault as the women create the spiritual atmosphere which enables men to make the appropriate decision. If women did not create the appropriate spiritual atmosphere, then naturally, men would make mistakes. The fault lay with the women, never with the men. If a man made a mistake, or seemed to be at fault in his conduct, it was certain that the woman or women in his life were not creating a properly 'spiritual substance' (oxymoron? - certainly moron!) This was a concept especially beloved by men in SES. Women somehow exude ?spiritual substance? which men do not.

Leon, thank you for posting this, I didn't express it quite as well when I tried to explain this a few months ago. It's nice to hear it said more clearly

leon wrote: The right response, we were told, when a Gentleman asked a Lady to do a task far beyond her capability, was for her to cheerfully attempt to do it, no matter if she strained her back or otherwise injured herself.

My mother was forced to dig a trench in the grounds at Waterperry when pregnant which caused her permanent physical damage and nearly lost her the baby.

Wow it's remarkable how much of this I'd forgotten about.
Thankyou to those who submitted their accounts through Leon.
The story of the guy with epillepsy beggars belief but it's not out of the ordinary for SES. Such is the ego of the tutor in that case. (I thought the ego and 'Big Red Me' were part of the base/lower self to be risen above??). But Shelly managed to twist it around and probably used 'the material' or teachings to vindicate himself. It really angers me to read things like that and I can just see all the helpless individuals looking on, unable to turn from sheep to goat and help the man or reprimand the tutor. If only there'd been a Dr present (one with balls enough to stand up to Shelly's outrageous treatment of the poor guy).
Although my parents are no longer in SES, my mum having been a tutor there for many years, my mum still comes out with pearls of wisdom such as the breast feeding guidlines and I wonder where it comes from. How on earth could I forget. I guess over the years I keep forgetting just how much of the SES philosophies I've been brought up on at home even long after I'd left St J and SES as a child.
In the case of women washing mens clothes I've heard this one before, but I've gotta say SHAME on the men who actually handed their clothes over and EXTREME SHAME on the ones who included dirty pants in their generous offering.
Ugh!
Ems

I just wanted to add that those who were onlookers (re the epilleptic attack) and did nothing - i can fully understand what sort of pressure and atmosphere there must have been at the time and even though you realise it was far from ideal to have let it happen, please don't beat yourselves up about it now. It's a shining example of mind control, peer pressure and the power of it, as mentioned earlier. It's just such a great shame things like this happen because there are always bullies out there willing to take advantage. It's just aswell the gentleman came to no physical harm.
I think, even if one person had stood up to the situation and reprimanded the tutor, I still don't think that would have been enough. It's so much down to the mind set of the majority. Anyone else would be considered a rebel and bad influence 'to be weeded' out as said earlier.
I just remember that bit in monty python's 'Life of Brian' where Brian says, "you're all individuals". The crowds shout together "we're all individuals" and a feeble little voice pipes up at the back, "i'm not". Love it!
Ems